arrow left
arrow right
  • ANDREW HARBAUGH, INDV., E-O JOHN HARBAUGH vs. SOUTHWEST GENERAL, ET AL.TORT-MEDICAL MALPRACTICE document preview
  • ANDREW HARBAUGH, INDV., E-O JOHN HARBAUGH vs. SOUTHWEST GENERAL, ET AL.TORT-MEDICAL MALPRACTICE document preview
  • ANDREW HARBAUGH, INDV., E-O JOHN HARBAUGH vs. SOUTHWEST GENERAL, ET AL.TORT-MEDICAL MALPRACTICE document preview
  • ANDREW HARBAUGH, INDV., E-O JOHN HARBAUGH vs. SOUTHWEST GENERAL, ET AL.TORT-MEDICAL MALPRACTICE document preview
  • ANDREW HARBAUGH, INDV., E-O JOHN HARBAUGH vs. SOUTHWEST GENERAL, ET AL.TORT-MEDICAL MALPRACTICE document preview
  • ANDREW HARBAUGH, INDV., E-O JOHN HARBAUGH vs. SOUTHWEST GENERAL, ET AL.TORT-MEDICAL MALPRACTICE document preview
						
                                

Preview

NAILAH K. BYRD CUYAHOGA COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Court of Common Pleas BRIEF IN OPPOSITION November 30,2023 12:09 By: ERIC HENRY 0086750 Confirmation Nbr. 3029902 ANDREW HARBAUGH, INDV., E-0 JOHN CV 23 975038 HARBAUGH vs. Judge: SHIRLEY STRICKLAND SAFFOLD SOUTHWEST GENERAL, ET AL. Pages Filed: 2 Electronically Filed 11/30/2023 12:09 / BRIEF / CV 23 975038 / Confirmation Nbr. 3029902 / CLSLP IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO ANDREW HARBAUGH, individually and ) Case No: CV 23 975038 as administrator of the ESTATE OF JOHN) HARBAUGH, ) JUDGE SHIRLEY STRICKLAND ) SAFFOLD ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) PLAINTIFF’S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION ) TO DEFENDANT SHAH’S MOTION SOUTHWEST GENERAL, ET AL. ) FOR ORAL HEARING ON PENDING ) MOTIONS ) Defendants. ) Plaintiff, by and through counsel, submits his Brief in Opposition to Defendant Shah’s Motion for oral hearing on pending motions. Defendant Shah and the other Defendants through “me too” motions, set forth an unsupported spoliation claim – seeking dismissal of the matter. Plaintiff timely responded in his Brief in Opposition and Defendants can file a reply brief. Defendant Shah requests an oral hearing of the facts and evidence already presented to this Court numerous times.1 Defendant Shah’s motion is made for purposes of further delay, and to produce his own narrative record to appeal any ruling not in his favor. An oral hearing is not required for this Court to make its ruling on the facts and evidence presented to the Court. 1Defendant’s Motion for oral hearing on Motions 1 and 2 are moot as this Court has already issued its Order re the same. Electronically Filed 11/30/2023 12:09 / BRIEF / CV 23 975038 / Confirmation Nbr. 3029902 / CLSLP Respectfully submitted, /s/ Eric W. Henry Eric W. Henry, Esq. (0086750) Katherine S. Knouff (0085566) The Henry Law Firm 8401 Chagrin Road, Suite 18 Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44023 440-337-0083 Telephone 440-337-0084 Facsimile eric@erichenrylaw.com Kathie@erichenrylaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Counsel for Plaintiff hereby certifies that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing has been sent to all counsel of record via this Court’s e-filing system this 30th day of November 2023. ERIC W. HENRY (0086750) Attorney for Plaintiff Electronically Filed 11/30/2023 12:09 / BRIEF / CV 23 975038 / Confirmation Nbr. 3029902 / CLSLP 2